A.
Context of the meeting--Continuing
its effort to receive information on transportation policy from a broad
range of viewpoints, the Civic Caucus today is visiting with Conrad
deFiebre, fellow, Minnesota 2020, who issued a transportation report in
January 2008 with recommendations to the Legislature. The report is
available at:

B.
Welcome and introductions--Verne
and Paul welcomed and introduced Conrad
deFiebre, fellow, Minnesota 2020. Minnesota 2020 is a
progressive think tank founded in 2007 by former legislator Matt Entenza.
Minnesota 2020 focuses on jobs and economic development, education, health
care and transportation. Before joining Minnesota 2020, deFiebre worked
34 years as an editor and reporter at the Star Tribune, the last
11-plus years covering Minnesota
politics and government from the State Capitol. He also was a copy editor,
night sports editor, southern Minnesota correspondent, and St. Paul bureau
reporter. He earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Journalism from the
University
of St. Thomas and a Master of Science Degree from the Columbia University
Graduate School of Journalism.

C.
Comments and discussion--During
deFiebre's comments and in discussion with the Civic Caucus the following
points were raised:

1. The benefits of more investment in
transportation--deFiebre contends that evidence is overwhelming
that investing more dollars in transportation, via gasoline tax increases
and other means, results in significant benefits to the economy. Thus, he
is puzzled why finding dollars for transportation can be so
controversial. A shortage of funds causes roads and vehicles that use
them to deteriorate.

2. Rail transit is important--
deFiebre said rail transit is very much a part of the economic development
picture. Civic Caucus members discussed with deFiebre whether rail
transit encourages compact development or urban sprawl. One can imagine a
cluster of housing, retail and office in the vicinity of a transit
station, which has been characterized as a desirable development to
encourage. But long distance rail can make it more appealing for people
to live long distances from employment, which contributes to urban
sprawl.

Continuing
the discussion of economic development, a Civic Caucus member said there's
no question that rail transit will have an impact on economic
development. The real question, the member said, is whether accomplishing
economic development is the main reason for rail transit improvements.

3. Capturing increase in land value--The
Center for Transportation Studies at the University of Minnesota was
charged by the 2008 Legislature to study whether increase in land value in
the vicinity of highway interchanges and transit stations might offer a
potential revenue source to finance transportation improvements, deFiebre
said. He has written a supportive article on that issue. See
http://www.mn2020.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7BAD5C288C-EECD-48CC-9B04-3F4539AC04B5%7D&DE=

4. Central corridor not designed as "rapid"
transit--Referring to critics of the planned central corridor
light rail line between downtown Minneapolis and downtown St. Paul,
deFiebre said the central corridor LRT is not being designed to provide
speedy commuter service, such as the planned Cedar Avenue
and 35W rapid busways. The central corridor LRT is designed to serve a
host of different kinds of travel all along the route.

5. Degree of emphasis on serving the downtowns--A
Civic Caucus member wondered why more attention isn't being given to
providing transit options for the vast majority of work trips (85 percent)
in the metro area that are destined for locations other than the two
downtowns. It is particularly noteworthy, the member said, when you
notice that the freeway lanes that terminate in the downtowns seem less
crowded than the freeway lanes that serve destinations outside the
downtowns.

6. Legislature providing more money for roads
than transit--deFiebre said many people have the incorrect
assumption that the $6.6 billion transportation bill approved by the 2008
Legislature was chiefly for transit. Only 16 percent of that
appropriation goes for transit, he said. The rest is for roads.

A Civic
Caucus member wondered whether a roads-versus-transit distinction is
helpful. The metropolitan area has a network of roads (slow, moderate,
and high speed) that serve all property and over which all types of
vehicles can travel. Transit vehicles, cars, and trucks use this
network. There's not one network for transit vehicles and another
network for other vehicles. Thus, the member observed, it is difficult to
understand why it is so important to overlay the existing network with a
separate right-of-way network of rail, where vehicles are fixed to the
rail and don't have the flexibility to use roads.

deFiebre
pointed out that the Central Corridor LRT will use existing right-of-way,
although others noted that, in effect, the LRT will remove part of the
roadway and create a separate LRT right-of-way. A member observed that
such an approach might have the effect of creating more congestion on the
roadway (Washington Avenue and University Avenue). deFiebre said Metro
Council projections show that future transit demand in the Central
Corridor cannot be satisfied without adding LRT.

deFiebre
said he is planning to write an article on the history of streetcars. He
said he suspects that subsidies for roads and bridges drove streetcars out
of business.

7. Questions about the structure of
transportation decision-making in the metro area--While
deFiebre hasn't paid too much attention to whether a new metro counties
organization is needed for rail transit (as authorized by the 2008
Legislature), he said it seems clear that a political disagreement between
the Republican Governor and the Democrat-controlled Legislature led to the
new structure. The new county structure is providing the funds for rail
transit that could not be found in other ways. Also, he said, the new
structure should work if leaders of the Metropolitan Council and the
counties organization can get along.

A Civic
Caucus member said that questions of assigning responsibility for LRT
operating deficits could magnify differences between the Metropolitan
Council and the counties. Moreover, the member noted, counties are
administrative units of the state, not just units of local government,
such as cities.

8. Questions about the structure of
transportation decision-making at the state level--Quality of
leadership in MnDOT and a lack of money are the main reasons for problems
at the state level, deFiebre said. He's not sure structural changes are
needed. A Civic Caucus member said that an issue at the state level might
be whether the Governor, with MnDOT's assistance, is providing a
sufficiently comprehensive strategic plan, covering transit and
highways.

9. Possible way to organize structural
questions in transportation--A Civic Caucus member said the
discussion indicates that several areas where structural issues might be
addressed:

--relationship between the Metropolitan Council
and the counties

--relationship between the Metropolitan Council
and the state (in light of new legislation giving the Council operating
responsibility for rail, within and outside the seven-county area)

--role of MnDOT in highways and rail. Currently,
MnDOT has a much stronger leadership role in highways than in rail.

--role of the Governor in an overall state
strategy for transportation

deFiebre
observed that given the size of the transportation issue, and the number
of participants, it is difficult to prepare an overall plan.

10. Substantial need for additional funds--Action
by the 2008 Legislature was the best news for transportation funding in 20
years, deFiebre said, but even with new dollars provided in 2008,
transportation needs are far from being fulfilled. MnDOT, for example
needs $2.4 billion per year through 2014, he said, but new legislation
will provide only about $400 million of that need.

The
Minnesota 2020 organization had recommended a gas tax increase of at least
10 cents a gallon, indexed for inflation. The biggest mistake the
Legislature made this year, he said, was failing to index the approved
increase (8.5 cents over several years) to inflation. The state has
condemned itself to an ever-shrinking source of funds, relative to the
increase in expenses, he said.

The group
briefly discussed whether the state's general sales tax should be extended
to cover gasoline.

11. Support for congestion pricing--deFiebre
said he supports imposing charges on motorists as a way of combating
congestion, such as fees planned for 35W south of downtown Minneapolis.

12. Concern over distribution of public affairs
information--As a veteran ex-employee of the Star Tribune,
deFiebre called the last 50 years of the 20th century the "golden age" of
newspapers. Most were monopolies in their circulation region and could
largely charge what they wanted for advertising. Moreover, they also had
control of classified advertising, a major revenue-producer. Thus they
could afford to hire enough quality staff for their news rooms. All that
has changed with the internet, he said. He doesn't see any way for the
trend to be reversed. He's not yet sure about the future of new on-line
news outlets.

13. Thanks--On behalf of the Civic
Caucus, Verne thanked deFiebre for meeting with us today.

The Civic Caucusis a non-partisan,
tax-exempt educational organization. Core participants
include persons of varying political persuasions, reflecting
years of leadership in politics and business.

A working group meets face-to-face to
provide leadership. They are Verne C. Johnson, chair; Lee
Canning, Charles Clay, Bill Frenzel,
Paul Gilje, Jim Hetland,
John Mooty, Jim Olson, Wayne Popham and John Rollwagen.Click Here to
see a biographical statement of each.